Spam detection software, running on the system "mx.qt-project.org",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.

Content preview:  On 1/6/2021 5:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
   > Am 09.12.20 um 16:04 schrieb ekke: >> I'm happy with the new Small Business
   License for my mobile app >> development. https://www.qt.io/qt [...] 

Content analysis details:   (5.5 points, 4.6 required)

 pts rule name              description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED          ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was
                            blocked.  See
                            
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                             for more information.
                            [URIs: qt-project.org]
 0.8 BAYES_50               BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
                            [score: 0.5000]
 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4      RBL: Very Good reputation (+4)
                            [23.235.223.118 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
 3.3 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS        RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
                            [50.201.197.204 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE          SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 0.0 LOTS_OF_MONEY          Huge... sums of money
 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL      Mailspike good senders
-0.0 NICE_REPLY_A           Looks like a legit reply (A)
 1.4 MONEY_NOHTML           Lots of money in plain text


--- Begin Message ---

On 1/6/2021 5:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Am 09.12.20 um 16:04 schrieb ekke:
I'm happy with the new Small Business License for my mobile app
development. https://www.qt.io/qt-for-small-business

Well, here's the new catch (compared to Qt 5 perpetual licenses): if you
stop paying your license fees you now must pull your app(s) developed
with Qt 6 from all app stores (existing users may continue to use your
app, sure), or in other words: you can only sell your Qt 6 based apps
for as long as you keep paying the yearly Qt license fees. That also
impacts giving support for your existing apps: you can only do so for as
long as you have a valid (paid) Qt 6 license.

That might not be a big deal for those small businesses that keep
developing (new) Qt applications, but it may be an additional burden for
others.

Now I am not even critisising this decision: after all, everyone needs
to make (keep making) money. I was just trying to explain why some are
put off a bit by this license policy change decision.

It is far more than that, but you have a very good start.

Does the purchaser of the "subscription license" get titanium clad in writing confirmation that fee will never go up or are you subject to the "shopping whims of the ex-wife?"

Consider this:

You build something using Qt 6.x and your subscription license. Surgical robot, drone flight control software, school registration app, whatever. You then sell that something to a not insubstantial entity, say municipal/county hospital, school boards around the country, NSA, entity with a big legal bat that can swing at will. Yes, even that po-dunk U.S.A. school system with 300 students will kick what they believe is theft or diving on a contractual obligation up to the state and the state A.G. will come looking for you.

Being fiscally responsible these entities make you sign a seven year support contract and there are some small annual fees that go with that.

Year 2:

ex-wife wants a bigger McMansion and a shiny new 'cedes. She looks around and sees that you are making a bit of money and more importantly are locked into a multi-year support contract with someone who could theoretically put you in prison for diving on that contract. Your "subscription" now jumps to $500,000 for the current year. It's more than you have.


This possibility (however remote anyone wants to claim) is why companies are dumping Qt in droves. It's also why quite a few OpenSource projects are being hastily converted to other libraries.

The other chatter about trying to make QtCreator a commercial product is also giving decision makers great pause.

When the known unknowns are too great one must look elsewhere.

---------

Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net
http://www.johnsmith-book.com
http://www.logikalblog.com
http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog


--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Reply via email to